The Challenge of Defining A Generally Usable Emotion Markup Language
Any attempt to standardize the description of emotions using a finite set of fixed descriptors is doomed to failure, as there is no consensus on the number of relevant emotions, on the names that should be given to them or how else best to describe them. For example, the difference between ":)" and "(:" is small, but using a standardized markup it would make one invalid. Even more basically, the list of emotion-related states that should be distinguished varies depending on the application domain and the aspect of emotions to be focused. Basically, the vocabulary needed depends on the context of use.
On the other hand, the basic structure of concepts is less controversial: it is generally agreed that emotions involve triggers, appraisals, feelings, expressive behavior including physiological changes, and action tendencies; emotions in their entirety can be described in terms of categories or a small number of dimensions; emotions have an intensity, and so on. For details, see the Scientific Descriptions of Emotions in the Final Report of the Emotion Incubator Group.
Given this lack of agreement on descriptors in the field, the only practical way of defining an emotion markup language is the definition of possible structural elements and to allow users to "plug in" vocabularies that they consider appropriate for their work.
An additional challenge lies in the aim to provide a markup language that is generally usable. The requirements that arise from different use cases are rather different. Whereas manual annotation tends to require all the fine-grained distinctions considered in the scientific literature, automatic recognition systems can usually distinguish only a very small number of different states and affective avatars need yet another level of detail for expressing emotions in an appropriate way.
For the reasons outlined here, it is clear that there is an inevitable tension between flexibility and interoperability, which need to be weighed in the formulation of an EmotionML. The guiding principle in the following specification has been to provide a choice only where it is needed, and to propose reasonable default options for every choice.
Read more about this topic: Emotion Markup Language
Famous quotes containing the words challenge, defining, generally, usable, emotion and/or language:
“Do your children view themselves as successes or failures? Are they being encouraged to be inquisitive or passive? Are they afraid to challenge authority and to question assumptions? Do they feel comfortable adapting to change? Are they easily discouraged if they cannot arrive at a solution to a problem? The answers to those questions will give you a better appraisal of their education than any list of courses, grades, or test scores.”
—Lawrence Kutner (20th century)
“The U.S. is becoming an increasingly fatherless society. A generation ago, an American child could reasonably expect to grow up with his or her father. Today an American child can reasonably expect not to. Fatherlessness is now approaching a rough parity with fatherhood as a defining feature of American childhood.”
—David Blankenhorn (20th century)
“In the continual enterprise of trying to guide appropriately, renegotiate with, listen to and just generally coexist with our teenage children, we ourselves are changed. We learn even more clearly what our base-line virtues are. We listen to our teenagers and change our minds about some things, stretching our own limits. We learn our own capacity for flexibility, firmness and endurance.”
—Jean Jacobs Speizer. Ourselves and Our Children, by Boston Women’s Health Collective, ch. 4 (1978)
“It is written in the Book of Usable Minutes
That all things have their center in their dying....”
—John Ashbery (b. 1927)
“In the present state we are in, we find such a strong sympathy and union between our souls and bodies, that the one cannot be touched or sensibly affected, without producing some corresponding emotion in the other.... We are not angels, but men cloathed with bodies, and, in some measure governed by our imaginations.”
—Laurence Sterne (1713–1768)
“The reader uses his eyes as well as or instead of his ears and is in every way encouraged to take a more abstract view of the language he sees. The written or printed sentence lends itself to structural analysis as the spoken does not because the reader’s eye can play back and forth over the words, giving him time to divide the sentence into visually appreciated parts and to reflect on the grammatical function.”
—J. David Bolter (b. 1951)